I disagree, in the context of art anyway. If you track 2 absolute beginners in their progress and one puts loads of work in and the other doesn't, obviously the one who puts in the work will most likely have better results.
But talent does become a factor, when you simply look at artists in general assuming they simply do at least what's necessary for them to get better.
In this context, talent usually means f.e. that one person can learn and develop much quicker than the other for some unknown reason, in the same amount of hours.
It also means that some people simply have 'a gift', in making their art really stand out for a lot of people, at high level. Others can devote their life to art as a hobby, but despite all the effort put into it, they can not reach the skill level of some truly great artists.
The same goes for soccer players for example.
I do agree though that it's easy to use things like this as an excuse for avoiding to put in the hard work and discipline. Something humans are good at, making excuses for themselves. :)
But hey art is a hobby, nobody forces you to do it. If you don't want to work hard, that's your perogative with a hobby. Some artists make a painting in a few minutes, with techniques a child could do. But there is no reason to judge that for anything else than them expressing themselves.